以下是我與德國在台灣講學的教授，關於中國哲學的對話。因為沒有徵求本人同意，所以如有錯誤我負責修改。

謝謝

==================================

博士先生，

我...注意到您是哲學系的教授，猜想您也許會中文，所以不揣冒昧寄給您我的書《論範例》的電子版，希望能聽到您的評論。

很感謝花費了您的時間，

致禮！

W

FYI:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/151162101X/ref=dra_a_rv_mr_ho_it_P320_100?tag=dradisplay-20&ascsubtag=061ffbbb99960b02d640b23d5d87a4f3_S

-------------------------

Thank you for sending me your work.
I am afraid my reading ability of Chinese is rather limited. So I cannot appreciate your work. Sorry.
Best,
C. W

Prof. Dr. Dr. C H W
Homepage with CV and publications:
http://sites.google.com/site/wenzelchristian1/

Dear Prof. C，

Thank you for letting me know.

I am looking for an translation of my book into German. I wonder if you are interested in working together with me for the purpose?

I still hold the ancient Greek's belief that philosopher's only meaningful life is to seek truth, nothing but the truth, as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle did 2500 years ago and nowadays, I know,  very few philosophers are willing to go that far.

I wish you all the best.

W

Yes, I also go for truth and beauty in life, and yes, that is what philosophers should do.
I am too much occupied to help you translate your book into German. Sorry. Maybe I will see you some time in Taiwan or at some conference?

C

I would like to go to Taiwan to talk about my new system of philosophy if invited. The problem with Chinese philosophers are that they feel ashamed to admit that they don't understand something as you do. It is their culture nobody can break the boundary even if for philosophers.

W

You are perfectly right. I have that problem with most Taiwanese philosopher professors that I have met. It is difficult for me to have a meaningful philosophical conversation with them. It is a mix of shyness and fear of losing face (and maybe even arrogance?). They are friendly on the surface, but in the end it is frustrating.

Is it better in Mainland China?  I believe it is. But I am not sure

Best,
C

Chinese so called "philosophers" are the same everywhere as you encountered, in the mainland it is even worse, trust me, since I had been one of them for 9 years before I went to America. They never understand what Socrates said "The only thing I know is that I know nothing". My belief is that there is even no "philosopher" today, in any western sense of the word, philosophy, What China has in its so-called 5 thousand years of history is only "thinkers", but, NOT philosophers. In the last 200 years since Chinese came to face westerns unwillingly of course, till now, nobody, absolute nobody, understands the western philosophy systematically - somebody might know 1 or 2 western philosophers at most, It is a big topic - when you have understood the Chinese as well as I do, you would become the world No. 1 漢學家 in the west, can you imagine? no kidding.

W

I drafted an Abstract for the book you might be interested.

Thanks,

W

==========================

Abstract for the book "Instancology“

“Instancology” is an author-coined word for the name of this new philosophy system on "The Study of the Instance and The Absolute.

The purpose of writing this book is to reveal: the final truth on the reality of our world- instead of 2500 years of searching for the fundamental existence or the Being of our world, it is the "Movement" itself, caused by the Absolute - which leads to forming our present, abstract (e.g. existence of Plato's Form or mathematics) AND material worlds.

Along this revelation, this dissertation tries to answer questions like "What is Heidegger's Part II (which he could not complete) of his book "The Being and Time", Is mathematics real? Is Plato's Form real? On the argument "What is the reality?", who is correct? Plato or Aristotle? After all, the 4 fundamental questions raised when philosophy in its infantile since ancient Greeks asked: Who am I? Where am I? What is my world? and How should I conduct myself?

The method used in developing this system is a new epistemology called "Pure Wu-Xing "(similar to the instance, e.g. when Archimedes shouted "Eureka! ") which explains the  mechanism for creativity and discovery, and which cannot be explained by analysis, reason, rational, logic etc. alone, in the past history of epistemological development in philosophy.

By using this new "Pure Wu-Xing", thinking studies thoughts and thoughts reflected on thinking - so on and so forth, each pushes other in turn to higher and higher circle upwards, eventually come to the Absolute, which is the final end of all rational: the truth of reality. It reveals that the nature of thinking is the Absolute also. And relating thinking to the Absolute in the outside world, the two Absolutes are identical. Along this line of logic, this system also throws new lights on the nature of language, Artificial Intelligence ethics and Chinese culture in general and reached its own new conclusions for each field.

Your project and vision reminds me of Hegel and his idea of the absolute. Don't you think so, too?
You also talk about Plato and mathematics. I will give a talk tomorrow about mathematics as art:
http://www.kunsthochschulekassel.de/willkommen/veranstaltungen/events/event/mathematik-als-kunst.html

I do not know Chinese well enough to have had the chance to appreciate the literature produced by Chinese "thinkers" (as you prefer to call them). But what I have learned has disappointed me so far. There certainly are some smart people and there is some insight. But is there any systematic philosophy in China? I did not see any so far. I doubt there is. Here is my argument: In philosophy departments today they read the classics that were written 2000 years ago and more. But where, I ask, is the development? No progress since then? Something is missing. Something is wrong.

C

Thanks for the info on your lecture (I don't know German well enough to translated it into English). You are absolutely right on your conclusion that there is no development of philosophy in the last 200 years since the Chinese came to know the west. A bit of development, if any, on the Chinese classical thoughts (I wouldn't call it philosophy in any western sense of the word philosophy). As to your question of what I talked about the Absolute and what Hegel's talk on the absolute. The difference is that Hegel's all-enclosing concept is "Spirit", or "Concept", or "Idea" (you know the original text better than I do I assume). He uses the word "absolute" to MODIFY that concept, but NOT the Absolute itself, similar to Heidegger using the absolute modifying Being as "Da-sein" in translation. So for Hegel, the core concept is the Absolute Spirit and for Heidegger, the Absolute Being, and for me (here you see new development as a Chinese in origin ), the Absolute itself in short.

If you'd like to know more I will explain more, I won't disappoint you I promise in my system at least.

W

（The End)